This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Formulaic communication redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I have retitled this to a less proprietary title, and proposed a merge of the simultaneously introduced and very similar page Formulaic Communication in the 21st Century. The two will then need to be rewritten to be an encyclopedia article, not essays, and to represent more than one particular person's jargon.
There is an alternative solution I seriously considered: deleting both and starting over. If the merge is objected to, I shall do just that. DGG ( talk ) 02:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I declined a speedy for "it is all very nicely written, with good markup, but it never says what it is about". I felt great sympathy with the tagger. I have a good knowledge of the English language, and I find it difficult to understand this article. I presume someone out there does, and I would appeal to them to make it a bit easier to comprehend. Give us a bit of communication, even. Please? Peridon ( talk) 22:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Formulaic communication redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I have retitled this to a less proprietary title, and proposed a merge of the simultaneously introduced and very similar page Formulaic Communication in the 21st Century. The two will then need to be rewritten to be an encyclopedia article, not essays, and to represent more than one particular person's jargon.
There is an alternative solution I seriously considered: deleting both and starting over. If the merge is objected to, I shall do just that. DGG ( talk ) 02:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
I declined a speedy for "it is all very nicely written, with good markup, but it never says what it is about". I felt great sympathy with the tagger. I have a good knowledge of the English language, and I find it difficult to understand this article. I presume someone out there does, and I would appeal to them to make it a bit easier to comprehend. Give us a bit of communication, even. Please? Peridon ( talk) 22:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)